Chapter 22 - The final family court hearing
The final custody hearing occurred roughly two months after Amanda’s sentencing.
Same year.
No long jump.
Amanda appeared remotely through counsel because incarcerated.
I appeared in court.
Dr. Ellis.
Therapists’ limited reports.
Child welfare.
No new witnesses needed.
Judge Elena Park made findings.
Amanda intentionally created misleading evidence for anticipated custody litigation.
She disabled/altered pool safety conditions.
She confined Claire.
She left both children without safe adult supervision.
Tyler nearly drowned.
Criminal conviction confirmed recklessness beyond reasonable doubt.
Then me.
The judge also found:
I had previously delayed certain pool repairs.
Minimized Amanda’s legitimate safety concerns.
Allowed marital conflict to influence Claire.
These failures did not cause Amanda’s decisions but mattered to future parenting.
Then order.
Primary and sole residential custody:
Me.
Temporary sole legal decision-making while Amanda incarcerated and during initial reentry period.
Amanda retains access to school and medical information through counsel/portal as legally permitted unless contraindicated.
No relocation by me beyond defined radius without notice/court.
Why restrict me too?
Children need stability.
Then Amanda contact.
Tyler:
Therapeutic video/contact may continue.
Claire:
No forced contact while treating clinician believes it would be harmful; court will review if Amanda petitions after release.
No automatic unsupervised parenting.
No termination of parental rights.
Then grandparent? Not relevant.
Then house already sold.
No family-property conflict.
Then court ordered:
Both children continue trauma therapy.
I complete parent-child reunification/safety education? Not reunification. Parenting support.
I had already.
Then:
No discussion of litigation details with children beyond age-appropriate explanations.
No using them as witnesses in adult disputes.
Then Amanda’s lawyer asked:
“Can order specify pathway for future contact?”
Yes.
After release:
Clinical assessment.
Supervised therapeutic visits.
Progress based on behavior and child response.
No guarantee.
Amanda nodded on screen.
No argument.
Then judge said:
“Accountability is not the same as permanent banishment.”
Claire would hate that phrase if she heard it.
She did not need to.
Then final divorce decree entered the same week.
Marriage over.
May you like
No remarriage.
No reconciliation.
